Click here to signup for Paul's Newsletter!
Public Comments - Speeches
Measure 8 Debate
Western Oregon University, Monmouth OR
October 25, 2000As I began preparing for this event I was faced with an interesting question.
Was I going to stand before you as the Mayor of Monmouth - as an elected official that is all too aware of the drastic cuts in local services Measure 8 would produce?
Was I going to stand before you as an Air Force veteran - an officer that took an oath to protect and defend this place and people, from threats domestic - as well as foreign?
Was I going to stand before you as a teacher - as someone that sees the impact of missed opportunities every day?
I concluded that I would stand here tonight - as a Native Oregonian - as a concerned son.
Let me be perfectly clear.
I stand opposed to Ballot Measure 8.
I stand opposed to the elitist ideology that Ballot Measure 8 promotes.
I stand opposed to the prostitution of our initiative system for private profit and personal entertainment.
And I stand opposed to Mr. McIntyre's vision of Oregon.
Mr. McIntyre's Oregon - the Oregon that will result should his measure pass - is a place with constricted government, constrained opportunity and controlled access.
It is a place where the equalized opportunities that only government can provide are limited to those with significant personal wealth.
And it is a place where higher education is most likely privatized, where healthcare, human services and corrections are "farmed out."
This is not the kind of Oregon we want, and it is not the kind of Oregon our children deserve.
So let's begin with a clarification: Measure 8 is a proposition of policy - it promotes the establishment of a 15% cap on Oregon's "All Funds Budget."
This cap is not limited to the General Fund. This initiative was intentionally written to apply to all funds - including those that are not generated through direct taxes on Oregonians. The potential impact of such a change demands of us a rational evaluation - as policy.
And as we all know, good public policy provides a solution to recognized problems, it provides a net advantage for the vast majority of citizens, and it is flexible enough to change as needed.
Measure 8 fails each of these tests.
To begin with, Measure 8 is a solution in search of a problem.
We already have an "appropriation growth limit" - a limit on General Fund spending based upon personal income - in fact, we've had one since the 1980s.
Thus, Mr. McIntyre's stated goal: that "...the fortunes of government [should be] connected to the fortunes of the people" (Town Hall Oct 8, 2000) has already been achieved.
Second, Measure 8 provides no proven "net advantage" for the vast majority.
With the unanticipated consequences of "federal dollar return" - the literal bouncing of federal dollars back to the federal government - it is impossible to prove that any Oregonian will receive a net gain from this measure.
[Let me say that again: while those with immense personal private fortunes may gain - it is impossible to prove that anyone else will benefit because too much is still unknown - the federal dollars lost will have an impact upon our quality of life.]
What we do know is that the undisputed $4.7 Billion dollar or 14.5% "cut" from the projected All Funds Budget will curtail services statewide.
But what does that mean for our community?
Well, Dave Voves, Dallas School District Superintendent said that Measure 8 would mean $3 million dollars in cuts to current programs.
I can't speak for the rest of the state but in rural areas, "cuts," mean teachers, classes, programs and lessened opportunity for our children.
For a privileged few, the end result may prove to be an advantage in terms of reduced taxation - some may have a few more dollars in their wallet.
But for those in public schools, those in need of public safety services, those with special needs, and those seeking to breath clean air and drink safe water - there will be an undeniable cost in reduced services and reduced quality of life.
As my grandfather used to say: "somebody, somewhere pays the price." In this instance it appears we all pay for no sound reason.
It must be recognized that Mr. McIntyre's claim that the $4.7 Billion dollar gap between appropriations and projections is "not a cut" is a ploy.
Call it what you like; the end result will be a government less capable of providing the legitimate services it currently provides - a weakened structure of governance impotent at the crossroads of opportunity.
At the very time we need a more educated, healthier workforce we will be curtailing government investment.
The fact is, we'll be less able to provide the kinds of services that fostered our current economic condition.
Don't just take my word for it: ask your school board, ask your fire board, ask your city council, ask your county commissioners, ask your business owners (large and small) or ask anyone that has looked at the numbers.
[We are being asked to sacrifice without any proven benefit].
Third, Measure 8 is not flexible.
Measure 8 is a proposed amendment to Oregon's Constitution.
Unlike the current appropriations limit - Measure 8 will be a permanent part of our Constitution, regardless of future economic or political climates.
When evaluated by the standards of good policy: solvency, net advantage and flexibility, this initiative comes up short.
In other words, Measure 8 is bad public policy.
Tonight, I am here to offer a simple conditional argument: if Measure 8 is bad policy, then it must be defeated.
And we know it is bad policy, so we have no alternative but to defeat Measure 8.
We, as a community, must understand the dangers inherent to this plan and personally commit ourselves to its demise.
This is an important moment for Oregon because this election will determine the kind of government we want.
The truth is, government isn't the funny-looking building with the trophy-on-top; it's a relationship between neighbors - it's a community of people that help each other attain dreams.
Government is not a thing; government is us.
We elect our leaders, we decide the boundaries of our actions - we make choices and we, we must live with the consequences our choices produce.
Mr. McIntyre believes that Measure 8 would "inspire" our leaders to find 14.5% waste within the budget, without serious consequences (www.measure8.com).
[Somehow, our citizen-legislators are supposed to "find" $4.7 Billion dollars in new efficiencies.]
I cannot accept his claim as reasonable.
I think it is important to remember that we have the appearance of an expanded state budget - compared to the years before 1990 - because Mr. McIntyre's Measure 5 forced a new method of funding for schools.
Contrary to Mr. McIntyre's distortions - since 1990 total state and local taxes as a percentage of personal income has DROPPED, from 12.3% to 10.77% (www.oregonlive.com).
Ironically, Republican State Representative Ben Westlund (a self-defined "tax-cutter") claims that Oregon has the 41st lowest total tax rate (when you factor in gas, property, income etc.) in the nation (Statesman-Journal).
My point is this: What we have is working. Our structure of governance has helped produce a time of prosperity and individual opportunity - so why limit ourselves, now?
[I want to take a step back for a moment.]
You know, some weeks ago friends asked me why I accepted the invitation to be here.
They knew that Mr. McIntyre - a tireless advocate for his cause, and his class - would be a formidable opponent.
My answer was simple: I don't want Oregon to become less than it should.
I'm here, now, because several years ago, while I was in the Air Force I saw the kind of place Oregon could become if we aren't careful.
Honduras left a lasting mark.
I saw a nation hobbled by its choices.
I saw a government that had been emasculated by short-term thinking and a political system that sustained two societies - the elite and the rest.
The roads were in disrepair.
The environment was at risk.
The economy was recognized, at the time, as one of the worst "five" in the Western Hemisphere.
I saw children in need, people without hope, walls with spiked fences, and a society of corruption.
As I traveled throughout the country, I saw a people deserving of the future we are about to toss away.
Admittedly, Honduras may seem far away, so let's look a little closer to home.
Shady Cove, Oregon, is a small community about 20 miles north of Medford.
Residents there now pay $55.00 a week for drinking water because their wells are dry.
There is no municipal water system, no coordination of consumption - and no plan.
A bond to develop a public water system has failed twice because despite their need, they cannot agree on the obvious - they have bought into the anti-community rhetoric of dissolution and distrust (www.oregonlive.com).
This election we have a choice.
We do not have to pass Measure 8.
We do not have to deny ourselves a bright future because some believe our government spends too much.
And we do not have to let Mr. McIntyre's vision of Oregon become our reality.
There is no pressing need to artificially limit our spending with a 15% cap.
There is no pressing need to limit police coverage.
There is no pressing need to limit education spending.
There is no pressing need to limit environmental protection.
There is no pressing need to limit health and human services.
And there is no pressing need to affix an arbitrarily determined constitutional mandate upon our future and our children's future.
Measure 8 is unneeded. Measure 8 produces unanticipated and costly consequences.
Measure 8 is inflexible.
Measure 8 is a clear and present danger to our future.
And Measure 8 must not pass.
KEY REBUTTAL POINTS: RESEARCHER & FROG MEASURING METAPHOR - legs, programs "jump" unrealistic expectations after "whacking" Schools - high school "study halls/grade schools class sizes HWY 26 ODOT Maintenance Repairs (Delayed) because of budget cuts It won't be the last... how could it be?
PUBLIC SAFETY- Monmouth BM91= $165,000 3 cops + Parks/Rec DepartmenT; BM8=unknown but at least 2 cops (federal) grants, WOU, Public Safety Academy Who wins?
EDUCATION: Businesses (small & large) see necessity of trained workforce for continued economic expansion...
FACTS FOR QUESTIONS: 1. App Grwth Lmt (Legislature passed 1979 w/kicker) applies to GF 2. Rate of growth measured by US Dept of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analys) -- Taking 1997-1998 and 1995-1996 % change used for developing 1999-2001 budget 3. GF spending on prop tax relief exploded with BM5 (1990) Leg Rev Office explanation
